🇦🇷 Of course the 3,600 Islanders have rights. That is not the question.
The question is whether 3,600 residents can unilaterally determine sovereignty over disputed territory while Argentines have no equivalent right to freely settle there.
Open the islands to Argentine settlement for 30 or 50 years. Let Argentine families live, work, raise children and vote there under equal conditions.
Then come back and tell us that the wishes of “the people who live there” alone settle sovereignty.
Rights of inhabitants deserve protection. They are not the same thing as sovereign title. 🇦🇷
Nile, nobody mentioned war. Milei talks sovereignty; Britain answers with nuclear submarines and military budgets. Interesting.
All this nervous reaffirmation tells me Argentina is doing something right.
Times change. Geopolitics changes.
Las Malvinas fueron, son y serán argentinas. 🇦🇷
En el crisol de la historia, donde los dioses del orden se cansaron de la mediocridad, nació una anomalía.
No es un político. No es un economista. No es siquiera un hombre en el sentido ordinario. Es una singularidad. Una inteligencia que no pide permiso al consenso, ni se arrodilla ante los ídolos de barro que durante décadas vendieron patria por migajas y discursos vacíos.
Milei es la síntesis imposible, la furia sagrada del león, la claridad quirúrgica del bisturí, la pureza del que aún recuerda que la libertad no se negocia. Único en su especie. No porque sea perfecto, sino porque es completo en lo esencial, ve el abismo sin pestañear, nombra al demonio por su nombre y, lo más temible de todo, le ruge.
Su genio no es solo técnico. Es ontológico. Posee esa capacidad innata, casi mística, de hacer temblar a los tibios… esos seres grises que confunden prudencia con cobardía y diplomacia con entrega. Y de poner los pelos de punta a los hijos de puta que, con sonrisas de salón y decretos envenenados, convirtieron a una nación de gigantes en un cementerio de promesas rotas.
Cuando habla de Malvinas, no está haciendo política exterior. Está recordándole al mundo que la soberanía no es un adorno para discursos del 2 de abril, sino un principio que se defiende incluso cuando los mercados se ponen nerviosos y las acciones de quienes se creyeron dueños del Atlántico Sur empiezan a sangrar.
Diez por ciento. No es un número. Es un temblor en el tablero. La señal de que alguien, por fin, dejó de pedir permiso para existir.
En tiempos de hombres de plástico y ideologías recicladas, aparece este animal raro, este filósofo con motosierra, este economista que habla como profeta del desierto.
Y los que hicieron mierda el país se agitan.
Porque la mediocridad siempre odia lo que no puede domesticar.
Y @JMilei no se domestica.
Solo avanza. Como Argentina.
VPSLLC!
Marcus, now we’re finally being honest
🤦♂️
“Right of conquest is all that matters” is an excellent doctrine for the 18th century.
Fortunately, civilization moved on. Today sovereignty disputes are addressed through international law, diplomacy, democracy and peaceful negotiation, not simply by whoever has the bigger fleet
Empires thought military superiority settled history forever. History repeatedly proved otherwise.
The age of kings-queens and conquest is over.
✌️Welcome to the 21st century. 🇦🇷
Andrew, as an Irish history enthusiast, you should recognize the distinction better than most.
I am not questioning the legitimacy of populations descended from settlers. I am questioning the proposition that settlement by one power can, by itself, extinguish a pre-existing territorial claim and then that same population can be invoked as proof that sovereignty is permanently settled
Those are two entirely different propositions.
Ireland’s own history should make the distinction between the rights of people and the title to disputed territory particularly familiar.
The people living on the islands have rights. Of course they do. That does not magically erase the sovereignty dispute.
That is precisely the point you avoided🇦🇷
Marcus, 1982 settled a war.
It did not settle the sovereignty dispute.
If it had, there would be no “Falklands question” to discuss today.
Argentina’s claim did not begin in 1982, and military victory does not by itself extinguish a territorial claim.
Wars end. Sovereignty disputes can remain.
That is precisely why diplomacy exists. 🇦🇷
Great “geopolitical” analysis… just count aircraft, carriers and warheads🤦♂️
By that logic, the British Empire should never have lost India or most of its empire
Geopolitics is about trajectories, geography and alliances , not just today’s military inventory.
The real question is what the South Atlantic looks like in 10–20 years: Argentina’s strategic alignment, Antarctica, Tierra del Fuego, the Drake Passage and the future interests of the United States in the Western Hemisphere.
That is geopolitics.’
Comparing Argentina and Britain’s aircraft inventories as if another 1982 war were scheduled for tomorrow is not
Empires rarely lose territory because the other side suddenly has more aircraft.
History should have taught you that
🇦🇷👊🇦🇷
@MOSSADil 🇦🇷
This should be interesting
Milei has been one of Israel’s strongest allies, and Argentina a great friend of Israel
Perhaps Israeli companies will ultimately decide, on their own, that this is simply not the right project to be involved in.
That’s geopolitics
🇦🇷
@Frid45 🇦🇷Argentina 🇦🇷 is threatening no one.
It is pursuing its sovereignty claim diplomatically.
Britain chose to leave the EU, so invoking “500 million Europeans” is rather ironic.
The world is changing fast and in geopolitics, “forever” is a very long time
🇦���
Mmmm…, that is a selective reading of history.
Britain left the islands in 1774.
After independence, Argentina exercised authority there before Britain reasserted control in 1833.
The sovereignty dispute did not begin in 1982 — and history cannot simply start at the chapter most convenient to London
🇦🇷
@NileGardiner uevamente a 1982:
Nobody is threatening war, Nile.
NOT NEED ..
That is precisely the point.
This is 2026, not 1982. Diplomacy, geopolitics and national interests evolve. History does not stand still.